Minimum Terms
Minimum terms set for young offenders by the Lord Chief Justice
17/10/03
10.00am
Court 4
Royal Courts of Justice
The decision of the Lord Chief Justice on the minimum term in the case of Sharon Louis Carr in accordance with the Practice dated 27 July 2000 (The Times 9 August 2000)
1. Sharon Carr was born on 21 December 1979. On 25 March 1997 she was convicted of the murder of Kate Rackliff who was 18 years of age. The offence was committed in the early morning of 7 June 1992 when Ms Carr was twelve and a half years old.
2. The tariff recommended by both the trial judge and the Lord Chief Justice in 1997 was 14 years. This tariff was reconsidered in 1999 and a tariff of 14 years was again recommended. This tariff does not appear to have been set by the Secretary of State.
3. A section 39 order pursuant to the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 was made.
4. The facts of the case are drawn from the trial judge's report to the Home Secretary dated 14 April 1997. The victim had last been seen alive outside a nightclub. Ms Carr was in a car with one or two older boys when they picked up the deceased to give her a lift home. The deceased and Ms Carr were in the back of the car when the deceased annoyed Ms Carr. Ms Carr pulled out a knife and stabbed the deceased some 30 times.
5. The body was then dragged about 100 yards and left virtually naked in a driveway. Most of the wounds required moderate force, two transfixed the body and would have required considerable force. The lack of bleeding suggested that some of the wounds occurred after death. There were also mutilating injuries to the breasts, vagina and anus suggesting a sexual element to the attack.
6. Two years after the killing she stabbed another pupil in the school lavatory. She was sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure for a period of 2 years (this sentence had been reduced to this length by the Court of Appeal).
7. It was while she was in custody for this offence that she admitted the killing of the deceased. Ms Carr's diaries were obtained in which she expressed sexual pleasure at the murder. She also expressed sexual pleasure at the murder in her statements to the police and others.
8. The trial judge noted that Ms Carr had a history of cruelty to animals and other violence. He also noted the psychiatric opinion which held that she suffered from a severe form of anti-social (psychopathic) personality disorder. Although the prognosis was unclear the underlying trend was of a very dangerous person.
9. He also noted that the magnitude of the risk presented by the defendant was very great indeed and the duration for which the risk would persist was more difficult to assess. He stated that the greatest care should be exercised before Ms Carr should be set free and he further noted that there was a real question about whether it would ever be safe to release her. The Lord Chief Justice endorsed this latter observation in particular.
10. Ms Carr has moved prisons on a number of occasions. She proved to be extremely difficult to manage. She was eventually transferred to Broadmoor Hospital on 16 June 1998. She was transferred to Braodmoor as she was reported to be hearing voices which she stated told her to do harmful things. She also reported voices laughing at her and calling her a lizard as a result of which she cut herself to check if she was human. There had also been a number of incidents of assault on members of staff and other residents. She also admitted to wanting to kill another resident through slitting her throat. (Report 6 October 1998.)
11. The most recent psychiatric assessment of Ms Carr dated 21 January 1999 records that Ms Carr suffers from auditory hallucinations which are more characteristic of schizophrenia rather than a depressive illness and that her mental condition requires continued detention in hospital for treatment. He further notes that on the basis of the limited information available to him about the circumstances of the murder that she appeared to be a prime candidate for a false confession. He also records that there has been a considerable improvement in her mental state since she was commenced on a drug called risperidone in 1998.
12. Representations have been made on behalf of Ms Carr by her solicitors in a statement dated 29 April 2002. This statement seeks to highlight that Ms Carr intends to pursue an appeal against her conviction for murder and wishes it to be substituted for a conviction of manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility. They also wish to highlight that Ms Carr's confession to the murder may now be in doubt and that the papers submitted to the trial judge (upon which he based his assessment of her psychiatric condition) were edited by the Prison Service.
13. The statement also highlights Ms Carr's awareness and insight into her illness and her acknowledgement that she should remain in hospital. A shorter tariff of 9 years is suggested.
14. The victim's father, mother and sister have attended interviews with the police and the CPS and have expressed the view that Ms Carr should never be released because they consider that the murder was pre-meditated and they regard the defendant as a threat to society. It appears from their statements that they all continue to suffer stress and anxiety as a result of the murder.
15. Nothing in the pages before me suggests the tariff of 14 years in this case should be revised despite Ms Carr's youth at the time of the offences.